Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!news.cse.psu.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.one.net!hermes.achilles.net!news From: pjlahaie@zeus.achilles.net (Paul JY Lahaie) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Date: 17 Apr 1996 20:40:38 -0400 Organization: A Red Hat Commercial Linux Site Lines: 44 Message-ID: <4l4326$19d@zeus.achilles.net> References: <4ki055$60l@Radon.Stanford.EDU> <31740061.389946B0@lambert.org> <4l19gb$sn8@zeus.achilles.net> <ALBERT.96Apr17172227@krakatoa.ccs.neu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.achilles.net Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:21787 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:696 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3328 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3172 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17687 comp.os.linux.advocacy:46286 In article <ALBERT.96Apr17172227@krakatoa.ccs.neu.edu>, Albert Cahalan <albert@krakatoa.ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >Wake up, people hate X. Part of "windows" is the boarder, icons, >menus, whatever. X needs 16 MB of ram to do what both Windows >and OS/2 can do in 8 MB. The curses library should send text Have you actually run anything real in Win95 in 8MB of RAM? It's quite pointless. If running means Solitaire, then yes, it runs nicely. >directly to the window system without all the xterm baggage. You could write a curses lib that goes through Xlib. It's just that no one has done it yet. >The X window system is absurd. Think about what happens when <code about the editor<-->ncurses<-->xterm<-->X snipped> >hardware - we are no better than MS-DOS! What is _really_ >absurd is that the data goes through the kernel twice, yet in >the end the X server just hits the hardware directly. Let's look at what happens when I run an editor in a Win95 window. The Windows kernel sets up a virtual 8086 machine, maps DOS into it, and starts command.com. It then emulates a PC console and translates the calls into appropriate Win API calls to do the drawing. >Here is a picture of the problem. >Existing: program---kernel---xterm---X---hardware >Better: program---WindowSystem---kernel---hardware Alternative: program--virtual machine--kernel--hardware I'll take a little data passing over setting up a virtual machine (that's doing address write protection to detect screen updates) to display text windows anyday. >just don't work. Would you like to have your kernel written >in SmallTalk, or an ugly language like C? X and curses are C - Paul